Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Clearly any and all forms of thought reform cannot be labeled as malignant. The agenda behind said thought reform is what is important.

Many ancient and modern martial arts instructors have employed the exact same tools as mentioned in those articles to reform their students. In many cases this reform was indeed malignant with the only agenda being wealth or power to the guy at the top.

In many other instances this reform was not malignant although the same tools might have been used (fatique, fear/love, repetition immediatly come to mind in MA training) purely because of the agenda behind said reform.

The easiest way to know if you are stepping into a benign or malignant thought reform dojo is to study the character of the instructor and his top students both on and off the mat.

What I am getting at is that if the slap is meant to enlighten instead of humiliate then its not so bad to get slapped sometimes. (In a metaphorical sense)

I agree with Alec. It's more the intent of the person in charge that makes this method benign or malicious.

I can see similarities with this to the basic dojo structure, especially with a high-ranking Shihan in charge. Maybe this has something to do with the Japanese strong emphasis on the Cultural Mind as oppose to the Individual Mind. (No disrespect intended)

i think the dojo i practice at is extremely laid back in regard to this sort of thing. even still, i can recognize so many things in our methods that are similar to what is described in the article. things that students are very subtley pressured into doing that are described in the article. acting a certain way during practice, bowing, repetition of words or slogans, etc.

not to mention the hunger part (i usually avoid lunch cuz it'll make me wanna barf if i eat, then go roll around a padded room at 5:30 haha)

it's just was a little shocking when i read the article. i realized that we do the a lot of the same things. i think the classification of malignant or benevolent is beside the point in a way. if im looking at it objectively then that stuff doesnt come into play. there's just the similarities, and i do find them alarming.

then again, i honestly do feel that the training ive received from my teacher(s), done at least with a little bit of similarly to the methods described in the article, have benefitted me greatly. i am defintiely a different person than i was 4 years ago before starting aikdio, both physically and mentally. and yes i do think it's all for the better.

i guess it's good to have the ideas presented the way they are in the link. if for no other reason than to help myself or others realize that there is something of a subscribed method to all the bowing and "onegaishimasu's" we do every day in our training. the method can easily be warped into something that isnt very pretty. maybe it's a reality check?

Personally I think there are plenty of people out there who could do with brainwashing, when you consider the state of their brains. Of course, in my case, it wouldn't fit in the washing machine, and, worse still if it did, it would shrink in the dryer

if for no other reason than to help myself or others realize that there is something of a subscribed method to all the bowing and "onegaishimasu's" we do every day in our training. the method can easily be warped into something that isnt very pretty.

There is a world of difference between agreed upon rules of etiquette that serve to oil the gears of civil society (or "subscribed methods", say, for doing medical procedures or priming walls for painting...) and the coercive division of the world into "us versus them" that characterizes both abusive spouses and religious, political, or martial arts cults.

yes, of course there is a big difference. or is there? im not trying to imply that we're all cluelessly involved in some wacky cult. however i was shocked at how similar some of the points and methods are. just food for thought that's all. even if we're the only ones chowing down.

and you're totally right about the us vs. them thing. IMO aikido's philosophy is something of an answer to that very question.

Clearly any and all forms of thought reform cannot be labeled as malignant. The agenda behind said thought reform is what is important.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing Wynand, but it made me think of a different question.

I have to wonder if imposed manipulation is "ok" regardless of the intent. When I say "imposed", I mean something which done in an exploitative fashion (taking advantage of a weakness) rather than a brute-force method (locking someone in solitary for 6 months while watching the Partridge Family or something).

To me, it's like the church/religion for kids. Aren't they essentially being brainwashed? Sure there are plusses and minuses, and the churches (for the most part) have good intent. But what is the end result? Is free thought involved in it?

All forms of thought control are malignant, starting with parental indoctrination, followed by school, supplemented by advertising, fashion, tribal customs, you name it. Any free people out there? Have you been deconditioned? Who did it? In what direction?